• Thanks for visiting the Kaleidescape Owners' Forum

    This forum is for the community of Kaleidescape owners, and others interested in learning about the system, equipment, services, and the company itself.

    It is run by a group of enthusiastic Kaleidescape owners and dealers purely as a service to this community.

    This board is not affiliated in any way with Kaleidescape, Inc.
    For official technical support, product information, or customer service, please visit www.kaleidescape.com

  • You are currently in "Guest" mode and not logged in with a registered account.

    The forum is free to use and most of the forum can be used by guests who are not registered....

    ... but we strongly encourage you to register for a full account. There is no cost to register for a full account.

    Benefits of registering for a full account:

    • Participate in the discussions! You must have a registered account to make posts on the forums. You will be able to start your own thread on a topic or question, or you can reply to other threads/discussions.
    • Use the "Conversation" feature (known as "private messaging" on other forums) to communicate directly with any of the other users here.
    • Access the Files area. The "resources" area of the forum contains many "Favorite Scene" and Script files that can dramatically increase the enjoyment of your Kaleidescape system. Go directly to great scenes in your favorite movies, created by other owners, and add automation to playback of your system with Scripts.
    • You won't see this annoying notice at the top of every screen!😊

    It's easy and free to register for the forum. Just click the "Register" button in the upper right corner of this page, and follow the instructions there.

Kaleidescape legal update

I don't understand. i thought all the talk was that even if kscape lost, existing owners would be grandfathered with respect to DVD imports and playback. i thought, for those owners (i.e. me), that functionality would be legal (or at least accepted).
 
Joe said:
I don't understand. i thought all the talk was that even if kscape lost, existing owners would be grandfathered with respect to DVD imports and playback. i thought, for those owners (i.e. me), that functionality would be legal (or at least accepted).
Click to expand...



Joe, the guys are talking about what to do with there DVD collections in the event K's contract with the DVD-CCA ends. The implied affect on us is that we no longer have to honor storing our DVD's to be in compliance because that requirement ends as well (in theory).

My take is that if we current owners do continue to get the promised K support, they (k) will still require we own the DVD. I do not know this for sure, and have never discussed this with anyone at K. Our contract is with K, not the DVD-CCA.


Jim
 
cinelife said:
Joe, the guys are talking about what to do with there DVD collections in the event K's contract with the DVD-CCA ends. The implied affect on us is that we no longer have to honor storing our DVD's to be in compliance because that requirement ends as well (in theory).

My take is that if we current owners do continue to get the promised K support, they (k) will still require we own the DVD. I do not know this for sure, and have never discussed this with anyone at K. Our contract is with K, not the DVD-CCA.


Jim
Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer. In simple language unlike the entire world who legally downloads from apple, netflix etc. They can store the movie without any dvd because it is NOT a legal requirement. Apple deals with the studios so no DVD-CCA requirements hold in the same way that Kaleidescape has to honour in its signed and disputed contract. Once that contract is void then we (The current customers) will not be bound other than respecting copyright to have the disk present. It does not mean technically, I think that we have the legal right to watch the movie that we have sold or given away to a third party. That is a copyright issue and one of ethical behaviour that any of us face every single day with this stuff.

Please correct me if I am wrong????

Peter
 
Personally, I have not litigated in this area. Much confusion stems from the individual owner's belief they can, or should be able to, do whatever they want with content they purchased. The problem is these "purchases" are not a full transfer of fee simple ownership wherein the full "bundle of rights" belongs to the purchaser. Content owner's regularly attach restrictions to the transaction. Although the courts generally uphold these restrictions when challenged, they have recognized a purchaser/owner's right to make an archival "copy" of content they've purchased. I have not read recent case law in this area, but I believe it still holds true that implied in the archival copy exception is the understanding that you still have the original ownership interest and have not transferred that interest to someone else by selling the original. Archival doesn't mean "burn a copy and then sell the content."

There are several laws at play in this area and unfortunately, like many laws touching complex areas, they have not addressed exactly what we can and cannot do. This is left up to a Judge's interpretation. (I know some laws are clear, but when contrasted against other existing laws affecting the same space there is confusion.)

Obviously, K's situation is based on their contract with the CCA, and not the laws mentioned above (although impliedly involved).



Jim
 
Peter, the problem with what you wrote is that it hinges on the idea that we Kaleidescape customers have "privity of contract" (a contractual link) with the DVDCCA. We don't. (so far as I know). Our link is, as Jim points out, with Kaleidescape itself.... Suppose for a moment, Kaleidescape and the DVDCCA made a new agreement would that affect us in any way? No because our agreement is with Kaleidescape.

So, as I understand it, no matter what happens here, I think the agreement we made to hold the physical DVD discs, which is between the customer and Kaleidescape, would still be in effect.

I also agree with Jim's interpretation above.

My concern is that K will be ordered to issue a software update that would make our dvd playback inoperable. :(
 
Not much really, and the ruling is not surprising. Rulings like this only protect the copyright owner's rights. A coyright owner is still free to contract away or modify their rights as was done with K's original contract, and the continuing argument in K's case with the DVD-CCA concerns terms and later modifications of that contract.



Jim
 
I would guess there could/would be a "patch" that allows one to add the data into the local database for bookmarking and any other behind the scenes data fields we currently don't have access to.

The larger problem would be that a severed connection would block access to the online store and disrupt the revenue stream.
 
Maybe they could find some way to become a sublicensee of UltraViolet and then charge us $1 to grant UV codes to our collection :)
 
Mike thats assuming you want to buy from the online store- what if you didn't? (I cant think of a good reason to not buy besides bandwidth). Ultraviolet makes me shudder- Ive had nothing but misery with that system.
 
Has any new news about this thread occurred in the past 6 months?

The appeal is still being litigated? The few DVDs I have in the system are still safe for now (grin)?

Cheers

JerryL said:
Thats Jim's opinion- which I am sure is a good one. However, I think constructive expressions of frustration due to the lack of information/ the fomentation of confusion on the customer side are likely to cause the people there to consider what/ if anything/ else they can do to lend clarity to the situation.

My opinion in having had (admittedly this is very limited) interactions with some people at Kaleidescape is they do care. BUT- in this kind of situation I just don't think you can expect them to say much right now. That's my take.
Click to expand...
 
Although I have not looked at the case in several months, my understanding is that it is still "pending." I think with each passing day/week/month the case becomes less threatening, and probably less relevant considering the K Store. The final disposition does of course have a broader impact on the industry, and is therefore of interest to most of us AV folks.

In any case, given that you already own a K System, your DVD collection should be safe going forward.



Jim
 
I would think both parties are probably happy with the case in limbo. Kaleidescape seems to be doing well in sales and it keeps the number of competitors in check. If they win, while it removes a cloud over them, it also clears a path for a slew of competitors who have zero legal costs to cover and can try and undercut them, eroding their margins.

For the DVD CCA, it keeps a finger in the dam. If they lose, it not pretty for them, but with the case still pending, it might have just as much effect as a victory as a deterrent to new people.
 
Good points Mike.




Jim
 
I would think if someone at Fox was crazy enough to get sufficient support behind moving into the hardware market, it would take them all the longer to sign-on with K's solution. Not that the coverage of his speach doesn't come off as an intro for K (other than how quickly 4K or UHD content would tear through those new C1 devices.)
 
I was hoping with this annoucement that maybe KScape could move away from having a M700 Vault as a requirement for Blu-Ray playback if Fox doesn't possibly see having a physical disc in there as a playback requirement and other studios come onboard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top